Tag: learning

Cognitive selection

For the time being, communication technologies, like social media, enhance the consumption and producing of information. In his paper, ‘The Dark Side of Information Proliferation’, Thomas Hills highlights that within information-rich environments, information is placed under forces of cognitive selection, which may produce negative outcomes, such as extremism or hysteria. To test Hills’ ideas on negative and belief-consistent selection of information, I decided to conduct research on how people choose textual articles and what sort of information they tend to learn from them.

According to Hills, we are prone to weight advantages over disadvantage. Therefore, negative information is more likely to be selected than balanced content. When we think about this fact, it seems sensible: negative information has more significance for survival. Indeed, you probably won’t doubt that for ancient people it was more important to know which berries are poisonous than how plants propagate. Despite the fact that in most modern societies, life is comfortable and safe, we are still prone to negative selection because it’s part of our evolutionary heritage.

Moreover, in the ocean of information within the internet, we find a sea which is similar to what we know and which confirms our existing beliefs. Hills explains belief-consistent selection by our propensity to defend the knowledge which make up our worldview and shape our identity. More than that, due to our biology, we understand and recall information in relation to causality structures that we already understand more efficiently.

To test Hills claims about these tendencies in information selection, I’ve conducted a small study. I’ve created a Google Form with several short textual articles. On the first page, participants should have read nine headings and opt for one of them. Respondents have been given four pairs of the same texts which differ from each other only in headings. While one article has got a negative heading, another one has been entitled in a more positive way. The ninth article’s heading has been made neutral. According to the first hypothesis, the majority of participants should have opted for articles with negative heading which would have confirmed negative selection tendency.

After reading, respondents should have answered on the question: “Which option does describe the meaning of this text best?” As you remember, the texts in pairs were absolutely the same and so were the offered options. Among four options, a half contained only negative information from the text while the rest consisted of positive ideas. All options had equal chances to be chosen because ideas were represented in controversial texts approximately in the same way. However, I expected to see the correlation between headings of articles (except for the neutral article) and answers. This would have supported the idea of belief-consistent selection.

The results confirmed both hypotheses. People opted for articles with negative headings more often. 25 participants (approximately 57 percent) chose negative headings while 15 people (approximately 34 per cent) read articles with positive ones. The rest was attracted by the neutral article. Also, there was a correlation between what participants expected to see in a text and what they interpreted as its main idea. For instance, the text devoted to privacy concerns about the use of Amazon Echo equally introduce both perspectives on the problem. But those who read “Amazon Echo could spy on users” decided that text criticized Echo while people who chose “Amazon Echo uses confidential information only with the knowledge of users and in their interests” thought that the article defended the gadget.

References

Thomas T. Hills , “The Dark Side of Information Proliferation”, Perspectives on Psychological Science 1 –8, 2018

Modern reading techniques

The way people read texts have been evolving since the very advent of writing: while Cesar’s contemporaries couldn’t read silently, modern people can process an impressive amount of information without any sounds. An influence of new technologies on our reading practices is touched in the Robert Clowes’ article “Screen reading and the creation of new cognitive ecologies”. In order to check whether his description of tendencies in reading corresponds to my personal experience, I decided to analyze my reading practices.

Reading is a powerful tool for acquiring new knowledge. Some scientists mentioned in the article claim that in order to gain real understanding of a subject, you should be immersed in a text. This type of reading is called deep-reading. It’s characterized by reflection, insight and inferential reasoning. As Clowes states, after digital technologies grew pervasive, a new type of reading, so-called hyper reading, developed in response to the abundance of available information (4).

In contrast to deep reading, the novel type of reading is non-linear and shallow. It includes skimming, scanning and text fragmenting (4). However, the author concedes that some ways in which people do reading may lie beyond the scope of deep/ shallow dichotomy. For instance, most academics don’t read a whole book when they make research, but we cannot label their way of reading lightweight.

Today, I woke up and checked my email via an internet browser on a laptop. Looking through the web page, I identified the most important messages and read them more attentively. To write answers to some of them, I had to visit some web sites and extract necessary information, which can be done in several clicks. Although the Internet gives you the opportunity to find whatever information you need, it also distracts you. For instance, when I hyper read checking the email, I always have to combat an overwhelming desire to watch some videos on YouTube or to chat.

Then, I read a prompt for a new writing assignment. I did it twice in order to understand it better. Close attention was paid to the deadline of the task and the limits on the number of words. In contrast to messages skimming, the reading of the prompt was linear and immersive. However, it would be ridiculous if I evaluated my deep reading ability by immersion in sequential description of the task.

The Clowes’ article, which makes up the ‘they say’ part of this post, fit my needs. Being aware of my vulnerability to external irritants, I protected myself from the Internet having shut off a Wi-Fi router. It turned out that I should blame my attention problems on propensity for idleness rather than on access to the global network: sitting on the kitchen, I often abandoned reading to make a cup of tea.

Then, I moved to the living room, far from food, and thereby motivated myself to read the article. I needed to extract only necessary information: the author’s view on the changes in reading practices. Therefore, at the outset, I scanned the text and sought the key words. Using Microsoft Edge, readers can search for a particular word, underline text and make notes. These tools were useful for me at the stage of hyper reading: when I tried to extract the material for the post. After I found an appropriate fragment, I immersed in the authors’ narration to get a handle on his ideas and not to distort them in the post. It worth mentioning, that the latter part of the reading process lasted for a longer period of time.

Thus, after my small analysis, I have learnt several things. Firstly, despite the fact that pervasive digital media have created an information-intense environment, they may not be guilty for our lack of attention. There are a lot of irritants beyond the scope of a digital world. Moreover, scientists’ concerns notwithstanding, the hyper reading may co- exist with the deep reading. For instance, I hyper read when I need to define important information and sort out a ton of useless data. But if I try to process a particular piece of information, I switch to deep reading.

Works cited

Clowes, Robert. “Screen reading and the creation of new cognitive ecologies”. 2017. Springer-Verlag London Ltd.